You can escape the
paradox without resorting to facile circular assumptions like "
God created
logic; thus God can
transcend it". The serious problem is with the definition of
omnipotence. The question in effect asserts that omnipotence includes the ability to perform impossible or self-contradictory acts, and then implies that omnipotence is a sham because clearly an omnipotent being
can't perform the impossible, because shucks, it's impossible. It's a
semantic rather than
theological or even
logical issue.
But even if it were, logic is not the
pillar on which theology stands; a relationship with the unknowable is. Logic must stand aside on any theological issue except the core dilemma the would-be
theist or
atheist faces: Is there a place in life for something which rejects the
rational? One answer leads to
religion, one to
atheism.
Well, that's a bit of a false dichotomy; agnosticism fuzzies it up a bit, among other things. Human beings have an amazing capability for rationalizing (as opposed to reasoning) and for containing marvelous contradictions without exploding; we're not simple machines.
(yam steps off soapbox o'pontification for the day)